[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] xfsprogs: update doc/CHANGES

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfsprogs: update doc/CHANGES
From: Nathan Scott <nscott@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 16:52:51 +1100
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20090124052859.GA32606@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20090123005648.GA3194@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1232774578.13684.5.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20090124052859.GA32606@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Sat, 2009-01-24 at 00:28 -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > + - Addition of the xfs_fsr and xfs_estimate tools previous found
> > > +   in the xfsdump package
> > 
> > rpm magic is probably needed in build/rpm/rpm.spec.in to prevent
> > old versions of xfsdump from being installed alongside the new
> > xfsprogs ... else rpm will report file conflicts, I think?  Same
> > will be needed in debian/control... hmm, both should be pretty
> > easy - just change "Conflicts: xfsdump < 2.0.0" to "3.0.0" (and
> > we should make xfsdump v3 at this time too, so its very clear).
> Agreed.  I think it's better to leave the debian part to you, and
> I'll look into the rpm part later.

Both files just need the above-mentioned change.  I'll send a

> Any chance you could also review the fsr and estimate manpage
> patches as they should go in before this one?

No worries - the estimate man page move looks fine (as long as
its also removed from xfsdump package, of course).

+//#include "config.h"
shouldn't be there in the final fsr checkin I guess - there is
no config.h in xfsprogs.

> +             if (fsetxattr(tfd, "X", "X", 1, XATTR_CREATE) != 0) {
the name needs to be namespace prefixed, so that would be:
    fsetxattr(tfd, "user.X", "X", ...);



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>